In a two-week period right after the 2024 election, the most energy expended by the transition team putting a cabinet together was toward Main Justice or the Dept of Justice.  As a consequence, those around Lutnick and Wiles spent an incredible amount of time thinking about the Attorney General pick.

Following an insider discussion, I spoke with several people about positions and appointments, focused on pointing out that the transition’s priorities were misplaced. The AG needed to be someone with exceptional moral character, capable of gathering information and presenting it for public consumption, with the option of supporting criminal referrals if necessary.

The Attorney General wasn’t going to be the tip of the spear in any operation to confront the Deep State, because if Main Justice wanted to confront Lawfare they needed to confront the Intelligence Community first.  The IC controls all of the activity within the Dept of Justice.

Read that again for emphasis.  For the issues of greatest importance, the Intelligence Community controls all of the activity within Main Justice.  The IC is in control of the source material.  The IC is above the DOJ.  If you don’t strategize a confrontation with the IC first, it doesn’t matter what you do with the Dept of Justice.

The best example I could reference at the time was the Mar-a-Lago documents case and Judge Aileen Cannon.  In that example the Executive branch was targeting Trump through the DOJ/FBI, and representing the Judicial branch Judge Cannon was the firewall ensuring the appropriate administration of justice.

Trump’s defense, through Cannon, pushed back against the DOJ (Jack Smith) while Smith leveraged all his Lawfare tools back against Cannon.  You might remember the “classified document” issue went to the 11th CCA.

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the government position that any documents defined as “classified” by the executive branch that claimed, “national security,” should not be disclosed to the defendant, Trump.  The 11th CCA said when it comes to matters of national security, the judicial branch must defer to the determinations of the executive.

Basically, if the intelligence community decides certain information is tied to national security and labels it as classified for the DOJ, that decision can’t be challenged. The U.S. Supreme Court has backed this view. As a result, when it comes to national security issues, the judicial branch has to defer to the executive, giving the IC significant control over the DOJ.

If you drag former CIA Director John Brennan into court and Brennan’s lawyers argue ‘national security’ as a defense against indictment, inquiry or questioning, it’s not the DOJ (Attorney General) who matters – it’s the ‘national security’ determination of the Intelligence Community (Tulsi Gabbard) who controls the outcome.

(more…)

Apparently when President Barack H Obama said that Aliens were real, his opinion was party based on classified “classified intelligence material.”  As noted by President Trump earlier today, he may have to declassify material related to the statements of Obama in order to protect him from prosecution…

.

(more…)

A good catch by Chuck Ross at WFB drawing attention to the latest Amici curiae appointed to the FISA Court.

Adding to a string of leftist ‘advisors to the court’ Jennifer Daskal has been appointed by FISA Court Presiding Judge Anthony Trenga.

Daskal was the Biden administration principal deputy general counsel at the Department of Homeland Security who launched the Disinformation Governance Board (Ministry of Truth) ultimately led by Nina Jankowicz.

Jennifer Daskal’s career has centers around controlling information from a leftist perspective and was one of the core officials who used the term dis-mis-mal-information to censor speech on social media platforms around COVID-19 and the vaccination protocol.

Daskal’s reach and control into big tech and social media is well documented. Appointing her as an advisor to the FISA court is troubling as she has joined Amy Jeffress, appointed amicus curiae in 2015 (Biden’s personal attorney), David Kris, a 2016 amicus curiae selection (denied Carter Page FISA application contained fabrications), and the infamous Mary McCord appointed amicus curiae in 2021 (sits at the center of every stop-Trump operation).

Washington Free Beacon – A Biden administration official who launched the Disinformation Governance Board and served as co-chair of the so-called Ministry of Truth has been appointed to advise the powerful Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, prompting concerns from some Republican lawmakers.

The presiding judges of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review appointed Jennifer Daskal on Feb. 1 to serve as amicus curiae for the court. Amici curiae, known as “friends of the court,” advise judges on legal issues related to foreign surveillance warrants in national security cases. Daskal served as acting principal deputy general counsel at the Department of Homeland Security under Biden. In that role, she drafted the charter for the Disinformation Governance Board, according to a Jan. 31, 2022 memo. (read more)

(more…)

Each day more and more people are starting to realize/notice there are elements of the United States intelligence apparatus that are targeting Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard.  The need for control is a reaction to fear, and Tulsi Gabbard has the DC Intelligence Community very worried.

What you will read below is something that was written back in 2024 about the potential for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), if President Trump were to win the election.  Subsequently, he did win; and while we are not saying this is the exact ODNI script that is being followed, we are certainly not disputing that either.

Read the roadmap below –Written in 2024– compare it to current events and decide for yourself if this is something that rings a bell and may explain the IC apoplexy.

The ODNI was created as an outcome of the 9-11 Commission recommendations.  In the era shortly after 9/11, the DC national security apparatus was constructed to preserve continuity of government and simultaneously view all Americans as potential threats.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) were created specifically for this purpose.

Washington DC created the modern national security apparatus immediately and hurriedly after 9/11/01.  DHS came along in 2002, and within the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 the ODNI was formed. 

When Barack Obama and Eric Holder arrived a few years later, those newly formed institutions were viewed as opportunities to create a very specific national security apparatus that would focus almost exclusively against their political opposition.

Here is the weird part.  The ODNI was formed in 2004, with the intent for the office to be the pivot point of a national security radar.   The DNI was intended to provide information to domestic agencies about foreign terror networks that would prevent something like 9-11 from happening again.  However, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence has never, not for one day, operated on this intent.   This is why they are such a critical position from my perspective.

The office was new, not established yet as a functioning silo, when Barack Obama and Eric Holder arrived in 2009.  They quickly dispatched an idiot, James Clapper, into the operation so they could weaponize around the offices’ fulcrum point.

Prior to the DNI office existing, the CIA radar would sweep externally and then report to the Office of the President. The DNI was intended to take external radar sweep (CIA) and make it a full 360° circle, adding a sweep inside the USA that would be handled by the Dept of Homeland Security.

The DHS sweep and the CIA sweep would then be combined into a central collection hub called the ODNI.  Everyone with responsibility for “national security” could access the ODNI material. Essentially and presumably, post 9-11 nothing like jihadists practicing to fly airplanes would be missed again; at least that was the intent.

(more…)

The blue slip process has been a part of the Senate’s judicial nomination procedure since at least 1917. When a President nominates an individual for a U.S. circuit or district court judgeship, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee sends a blue slip —a form colored blue— to the two Senators representing the nominee’s home state. This form allows the Senators to express their opinions about the nominee.

Positive Response: If a home-state Senator has no objections, they return the blue slip with a positive response, indicating support for the nominee. Negative Response or Withholding: If a Senator objects, they may either return the slip with a negative response or choose not to return it at all. In both cases, this is treated as a lack of support for the nominee, which halts the nomination process.

JD Vance notes this process is being used to manipulate the appointments of Judges in leftist states.  This creates a dual justice system; one of the core issues within our extremely divided nation.

[SOURCE]

JD Vance is not wrong.  However, as with all things corrupted within the state of our Republic, if the blue slip process is removed the next leftist President can corrupt the judiciary within Republican states.

Of course, all of this is an outcome of the 17th Amendment, which stopped the state legislatures from having control over their senators.  Under the original constitutional framework, the Senate was designed to represent the interests of the state, as the Senators were appointed by state legislature, not popular votes.  The Sea Island assembly destroyed this cornerstone when they triggered the 17th Amendment.

Repeal the 17th Amendment, and just about everything in federal government changes.

(more…)

Senator Elissa Slotkin (Mich), a former CIA analyst who worked in the State Department and Pentagon during the Obama administration, organized a viral video with Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona, Reps. Chris Deluzio and Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, Rep. Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire, and Rep. Jason Crow of Colorado.

The six congressional representatives directed their coordinated communication to members of the military and intelligence community. “Right now, the threats to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad, but from right here at home. Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders … you must refuse illegal orders,” they asserted.

However, when questioned about what “illegal orders” President Trump has created, the six members are suddenly very quiet.  White House Deputy Chief of Staff, Stephen Miller responds:

.

Ultimately, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi could easily assign an FBI agent and U.S attorney to question the six members about the “illegal orders” they are telling the military and intelligence community to defy.

If Slotkin, Kelly and the rest cannot present evidence of an illegal order they are referring to, that would be a qualification that should presumably invoke a First Amendment defense claim, then charge them with simple sedition as defined in statute.

(more…)

It has often been said that a person cannot serve two masters.  Throughout years of reviewing the activity of the FBI, one larger picture is clear; the primary mission of the FBI is to protect the interests of Washington, DC – not to protect the interests of truth.

There are two recent sub-contexts for an internal conflict taking place between the Director of the FBI, Kash Patel, and the Director of the Office of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard.

♦ The first issue surfaces from the ODNI’s office investigating the potential for foreign intelligence to have participated in the background of the Charlie Kirk assassination.  The director of the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), Joe Kent, has been reviewing the potential for Charlie Kirk’s assassin to have received influence or support from foreign interests, specifically foreign intelligence.

FBI Director Kash Patel is not happy that NCTC Director Joe Kent reviewed the investigative case file of Tyler Robinson as part of the NCTC review.  Presumably, Patel is worried that any investigation of potential support for the assassination may create reasonable doubt for a jury in the case against Robinson. {STORY HERE}

On one-hand the issue is somewhat territorial, with the FBI guarding their investigation in order to ensure a successful prosecution.  However, on the other hand, if the investigation is to find the truth of the issues behind the murder, then why would the FBI be concerned about the NCTC checking to see if associations in/around Tyler Robinson may have contributed to the assassination?  The truth should have no agenda.

(more…)

We have discussed at length how the EU/NATO intelligence apparatus will do anything to keep U.S. President Trump and Russian President Putin in conflict against each other. As a consequence of tracking the datapoints around this issue, these events in Romania and Hungary cannot be perceived as coincidental.

Remember, what the EU intelligence apparatus did in Romania to control the election result. Remember also, the largest NATO base is being built in Romania. We understand the EU/NATO (CIA) agenda for Romania with clear eyes.

Now, two simultaneous oil refineries explode. One of them a Russian-owned refinery in Romania, the other a refinery in Hungary that processes Russian oil.

According to Daily News Hungary, the Romanian explosion happened in Ploiești, in the Wallachian region, the refinery is one of Romania’s largest, with a capacity of over 2.5 million tonnes. the refinery is owned by the Russian company Lukoil.

The refinery in Hungary at Százhalombatta refines Russian oil. It erupted in flames on Monday night. “The fire broke out on Monday night at the Dunai Refinery’s AV3 unit. It was swiftly contained, and firefighters have remained on site since, MOL stated in a press release issued last night.” […] “According to information obtained by index.hu from industry insiders, the entire oil refinery faces the possibility of a complete shutdown. Prime Minister Orbán Viktor, in his morning post, has promised the strictest investigation into the fire.”

In related news, the Budapest summit in Hungary between Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President Donald Trump has been delayed.

(more…)

Several people have sent this segment with Steve Bannon to me with various “check this out” notations. I’m just happy a wider audience is starting to realize the problems created by a rogue Central Intelligence Agency.

Steve Bannon draws attention to the CIA lying to Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner during their efforts to organize the Israel/Hamas peace agreement {Backstory Here}. Bannon attributes the wrong CIA information to the Israeli intelligence service commonly known as Mossad.

From this perspective Israel was intentionally trying to stop Team Trump from organizing a Gaza ceasefire and peace agreement, which was also the Israeli motive for bombing Hamas in Doha, Qatar, at the critical moment when Witkoff and Kushner were about to present the framework to Qatar.  WATCH:

BANNON: The CIA briefed Witkoff three times a day, and they LIED TO HIM. They told him Hamas wouldn’t negotiate, pushing Bibi’s line to sabotage peace. That wasn’t bad intel; THAT WAS TREASONOUS DECEPTION. RATCLIFFE SHOULD RESIGN TODAY!! pic.twitter.com/zXIb66NUsv

— Bannon’s WarRoom (@Bannons_WarRoom) October 20, 2025

I’m not sure if purposeful malice from the Israeli intelligence service can be applied to the false CIA information, or if Hanlon’s Razor should be considered. However, it would be super cool if President Trump sent a message on Truth Social saying: “Following the revelations about the CIA getting it wrong, made by the brilliantly honest Steve Witkoff during Mideast peace negotiations, I am asking CIA Director John Ratcliffe to provide an explanation within 48 hours to include who was involved, and how the CIA came to such materially incorrect conclusions. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.”

The point Mr Bannon made about how the U.S. Intelligence Community operatives view DNI Tulsi Gabbard is very accurate; they hate her. We cannot afford to lose Ms Gabbard because she fights.

(more…)

**BUMPED** How is it that an insignificant corner of the internet could predict the removal of the U.S. National Security Advisor, specifically as the first administration official to be removed, more than two months before Donald Trump was sworn in as President on January 20, 2025?

To understand the complexity of the intelligence information flow, consider:

The silo system is made up, in part, of: The National Security Council (10+ desks, 15 staff/analysts per), the National Security Advisor to the Office of the President, the Dept of Justice National Security Division [DOJ-NSD (foreign review section, counterintelligence export control section, cyber section, counterterrorism section)], Central Intelligence Agency [(CIA), National Intelligence Council, Directorate of Analysis], Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI (Counterintelligence, Counterterrorism, WMD Directorate, Directorate of Intelligence, Cyber)], the Office of the Director of National Intelligence [ODNI (Requirements, Analysis, Collection, National Counterterrorism Center, Mission Managers)], the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the Dept of Defense [DoD, (Nuclear, Chemical, Biological, Industrial, International)], the National Security Agency [NSA (Operations, Technology, Cyber], and many more.

Each agency/office a silo, with distinct sub-silos, each with equity stakes in the information they gather, review and analyze; ultimately attributing classification level and intersecting analysis with each other agency as mission aligned.

Sound ridiculous?  It probably is, yet we’ve merely scratched the surface of the networks and information flows that swirl around the Office of the President.

How does President Trump frame his world view?  Who organizes the information that is prioritized to reach his desk?

It is very easy to say, “President Trump has to know about (fill_in_blank),” without contemplating the process by which President Trump would know about (fill_in_blank).  The recent remarks by President Trump, surrounding COVID-19 vaccine efficacy, should put a spotlight on this consequential dynamic.

(more…)